Half scenes with static elements, other with spawn - unity3d

I have 2D game, where half scene with spawn enemies and (for example) other half scene, where I want use static enemies and other elements.
I thought to create sript that after some time (for example 10 seconds), will stop spawn scripts , and run the movement of other elements.
So. Maybe there is a reasonable solution to this problem.
[UPDATE]
I need the most sensible solution of such a problem, I do not mean to do this, but how to make it better.
1) Can make static elements, which will be a certain time, just stand behind the camera, and then move ... or programmatically create static elements, over time, in advance of known locations...Or download the entire stack of elements over time.
2) Or can completely abandon this idea. A striking example is the Subway Surf, there static scenes (layout) are created in random order.
P.s. I hope I have explained my problem

Just learn to use "Invoke", it's extremely simple.
Invoke( "YourOtherRoutine", 10f );
So after ten seconds it will run the other routine. That routine could easily stop one script running, start another script running, or, whatever it is you want to do. There are tens of thousands of examples of Invoke() and InvokeRepeating() on the usual Unity forums, etc.

From your reference to Subway Surf, I assume that you want to generate static elements like the path and static trains in subway surf and non-Static elements like some moving trains. If so then I have a possible solution.
You can create pre-defined sets of elements (let say 20 or 30 set with different combination of elements) and then spawn them randomly one after another. e.g. have a look at the two reference images below.
Now, note that you might see these scenes exactly as in the images multiple times while playing the game, this is because they are pre-created, The developers behind Subway surf have created these paths and saved them as prefabs and then spawn them at different locations during game play.
You might have noticed that sometime the path is the same but the position of trains is different. This can be achieved by further creating spawn points on your path and then at runtime randomly select points on which you want to spawn your static elements.
In many cases when there are more than one gates you can pass through (I am referring to the gate in the second image). the moving trains spawns on the path of the gate you cross. Spawning the moving train can be achieved as mentioned in step two with a movement script attached to it. Regarding the question of how to know on what path to spawn there are two possible ways (that I can think of right know).
You can keep track of your players current lane and then spawn the train on that lane.
You can place separate triggers on each lane and then detect which lane trigger was triggered and then spawn the train on that lane.
For other moving trains just use the method in step 2 to spawn them but with a movement script attached.

Related

To use GKAgents or not

I am developing (or atleast trying to develop)
a decently big real time tactics game (something similar to RTS) using SpriteKit.
I am using GamePlay kit for pathfinding.
Initially I used SKActions to move the sprites within the Path but fast enough I realized that it was a big mistake.
Then I tried to implement it with GKAgents (this is my current state)
I feel that GKAgents are very raw and premature also they are following some strange Newton Law #1 that makes them to move forever (I can't think of any scenario where it would be useful - maybe for presentations at WWDC)
as well as I see that they have some Angular speed to perform rotations
which I don't need at all and can't really find how to disable it...
As well as GKBehaviors given a GKGoals seems to make some weird thing...
Setting behavior to avoid obstacles makes my units to joggle around them...
Setting behavior with follow path goal completely ignores everything unless the maxPredictionTime is low enough...
I am not even willing to tell what happens when I combine both them.
I feel broken...
I feel like I have 2 options now:
1) to struggle more with those agents and trying to make them behave as I wish
2) To roll all the movement on my own with help by GKObstacleGraph and a path Finding (which is buggy as well I have to say at some points the path to the point will generate the most awful path like "go touch that obstacle then reverse touch that one then go to the actual point (which from the beginning could be achieved by a straight line)").
Question is:
What would be the best out of those options ?
One of the best ways (in SpriteKit/GameplayKit) to get the kind of behavior you're after is to recognize that path planning and path following need not be the same operation. GameplayKit provides tools for both — GKObstacleGraph is good for planning and GKAgent is good for following a planned path — and they work best when you combine the strengths of each.
(It can be a bit misleading that GKAgent provides obstacle avoidance; don't think of this in the same way as finding a route around obstacles, more like reacting to sudden obstacles in your way.)
To put it another way, GKObstacleGraph and GKAgent are like the difference between navigating with a map and safely driving a car. The former is where you decide to take CA-85 and US-101 instead of I-280. (And maybe reevaluate your decision once in awhile — say, to pick a different set of roads around a traffic jam.) The latter is where you, continuously moment-to-moment, change lanes, avoid potholes, pass slower vehicles, slow down for heavy traffic, etc.
In Apple's DemoBots sample code, they break this out into two steps:
Use GKObstacleGraph to do high level path planning. That is, when the bad guys are "here" and the hero is "way over there", and there are some walls in between, select a series of waypoints that roughly approximates a route from here to there.
Use GKAgent behaviors to make the character roughly follow that path while also reacting to other factors (like making the bad guys not step on each other and giving them vaguely realistic movement curves instead of simply following the lines between waypoints).
You can find most of the relevant stuff behind this in TaskBotBehavior.swift in that sample code — start from addGoalsToFollowPath and look at both the places that gets called and the calls it makes.
As for the "moving forever" and "angular speed" issues...
The agent simulation is a weird mix of a motivation analogy (i.e. the agent does what's needed to move it toward where it "wants" within constraints) and a physics system (i.e. those movements are modeled like forces/impulses). If you take away an agent's goals, it doesn't know that it needs to stop — instead, you need to give it a goal of stopping. (That is, a movement speed goal of zero.) There might be a better model than what Apple's chosen here — file bugs if you have suggestions for design improvements.
Angular speed is trickier. The notion of agents' intrinsic physical constraints being sort of analogous to, say, vehicles on land or boats at sea is pretty well baked into the system. It can't really handle things like space fighters that have to reorient to vector their thrust, or walking creatures that can just as happily walk sideways or backwards as forward — at least, not on its own. You can get some mileage toward changing the "feel" of agent movement with the maxAcceleration property, but you're limited by the fact that said property covers both linear and angular acceleration.
Remember, though, that the interface between what the agent system "wants" and what "actually happens" in your game world is under your control. The easiest way to implement GKAgentDelegate is to just sync the velocity and position properties of the agent and the sprite that it represents. However, you don't have to do it that way — you could calculate a different force/impulse and apply it to your sprite.
I can't comment yet so I post as an answer. I faced the same problem recently: agent wiggling around the target or the agent that keeps moving even if you remove the behavior. Then I realized that the behavior is just the algorithm controling the movement, but you can still access and set the agent's speed, position and angle by hand.
In my case, I have a critter entity that chases for food in the scene. When it makes contact with the food agent, the food entity is removed. I tried many things to make the critter stop after eating the food (it would keep going in a straight line). And all I had to do was to set its speed to 0. That is because the behavior will influence not the position directly, but the speed/angle combination instead (from what I understand). When there is no goal for the entity, it doesn't "want" to change it's state, so whatever speed and direction it reached, it will keep. It will simply not update/change it. So unless you create a goal to make it want to stop, it will wiggle/keep going. The easy way is to set the behavior to nil and set the speed to 0 yourself.
If the behavior/goal system doesn't do it for the type of animation you are looking for, you can still use the Agent system and customize the movement with the AgenDelegate protocol and the update method and make it interact with other agents later on. You can even synchronize the agent with a node that is moved with the physics engine or with actions (or any other way).
I think the agent system is nice to keep around since you can use it later, even if it's only for special effects. But just as mixing actions and physics can give some weird results, mixing goal/behaviors and any other "automated" tool will probably result in an erratic behavior.
You can also use the agent system for other stuff than moving an actual sprite around. For example, you could use an agent to act as a "target seeker" to simulate reaction time for your enemies. The agent moves around the scene and finds other agents, when it makes contact with a suitable target, the enemy entity would attack it (random idea).
It's not a "one size fits all" solution, but it's a very nice tool to have.

interaction with objects in xna

I'm new to using xna and I want to make my player collide with with multipe walls from the same class. So I looked around and I understood that the best way for doing that is to create a list of variables containing the walls id's and make a loop that circles them all and then returns the variable of the objects that collide.
My question is if there is a faster more efficient way for doing that? I mean if I have like 10000 objects that loop can cause a lot of memory use.
Thx in advance
Option 1) If these 10000 object are walls of a level, then you should probably use some sort of grid (like this very old example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda#mediaviewer/File:Legend_of_Zelda_NES.PNG)
With a grid you only have to check collision with adjacent objects, or only with objects that are nearby.
Option 2) If these 10000 objects are enemies or bullets that move more freely, then you could also calculate the distance first and only check for collision if the objects are nearby.
But may I ask why you are using XNA? I used to work with XNA 4.x but in my understanding it is pretty much dead (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/389018/microsoft-email-confirms-plan-to-cease-xna-support). If you're new to XNA, I would advice to use other software to make games (like Unity3D). In Unity3D the hard part of collision detection is done for you (is has standard functions for collision detection) and Unity3D also works with C# (like XNA)
You always want to do the least amount of processing to get the job done. For a tiled 2D game you usually have a 2 dimensional grid. When the player want to walk on a certain tile you can check that tile if it is allowed to walk there. In this case you just have to check a single tile. If you have a lot of NPC's you could divide your map into sections and keep track of in what sections the NPC's are. Now you just have to do collision detection on the enemies within your section.
When you need expensive collision, pixel perfect or polygon collision you should first check if an object is even close with a simple radius float or BoundingSphere only then you go on with more expensive collision detection.
Same goes for pretty much anything, if you have a 100x100 tilemap but only need to draw 20x10 for the screen then you should just render that portion by calculations. In unreal, mappers create invisible boxes, when inside these boxes it only draws a certain part of the map and only checks collision within these boxes. GameDev is all about tricks to make things work smoothly.

iPhone pathfinding implementation

I am trying to create a Pacman AI for the iPhone, not the Ghost AI, but Pacman himself. I am using A* for pathfinding and I have a very simple app up and running which calculates the shortest path between 2 tiles on the game board avoiding walls.
So running 1 function to calculate a path between 2 points is easy. Once the function reaches the goalNode I can traverse the path backwards via each tiles 'parentNode' property and create the animations needed. But in the actual game, the state is constantly changing and thus the path and animations will have to too. I am new to game programming so I'm not really sure the best way to implement this.
Should I create a NSOperation that runs in the background and constantly calculates a goalNode and the best path to it given the current state of the game? This thread will also have to notify the main thread at certain points and give it information. The question is what?
At what points should I notify the main thread?
What data should I notify the main thread with?
...or am I way off all together?
Any guidance is much appreciated.
What I would suggest for a pacman AI is that you use a flood fill algorithm to calculate the shortest path and total distance to EVERY tile on the grid. This is a much simpler algorithm than A*, and actually has a better worst case than A* anyway, meaning that if you can afford A* every frame, you can afford a flood fill.
To explain the performance comparison in a in a little bit more detail, imagine the worst case in A*: due to dead ends you end up having to explore every tile on the grid before you reach your final destination. This theoretical case is possible if you have a lot of dead ends on the board, but unlikely in most real world pacman boards. The worst case for a flood fill is the same as the best case, you visit every tile on the map exactly once. The difference is that the iterative step is simpler for a flood fill than it is for an A* iteration (no heuristic, no node heap, etc), so visiting every node is faster with flood fill than with A*.
The implementation is pretty simple. If you imagine the grid as a graph, with each tile being a node and each edge with no wall between neighboring tiles as being an edge in the graph, you simply do a breadth first traversal of the graph, keeping track of which node you came from and how many nodes you've explored to get there. You mark a node as visited when you visit it, and never visit a node twice.
Here's some pseudo code to get you started:
openlist = [ start_node ]
do
node = openlist.remove_first()
for each edge in node.edges
child = node.follow_edge(edge)
if not child.has_been_visited
child.has_been_visited = true
child.cost = node.cost + 1
child.previous = node
openlist.add(child)
while openlist is not empty
To figure out how to get pacman to move somewhere, you start with the node you want and follow the .previous pointers all the way back to the start, and then reverse the list.
The nice thing about this is that you can make constant time queries about the cost to reach any tile on the map. For example, you can loop over each of the power pellets and calculate which one is closest, and how to get there.
You can even use this for the ghosts to know the fastest way to get back to pacman when they're in "attack" mode!
You might also consider flood fills from each of the ghosts, storing in each tile how far away the nearest ghost is. You could limit the maximum distance you explore, not adding nodes to the open list if they are greater than some maximum cost (8 squares?). Then, if you DID do A* later, you could bias the costs for each tile based on how close the ghosts are. But that's getting a little beyond what you were asking in the question.
It should be fast enough that you can do it inline every frame, or multithread it if you wish. I would recommend just doing it in your main game simulation thread (note, not the UI thread) for simplicity's sake, since it really should be pretty fast when all is said and done.
One performance tip: Rather than going through and clearing the "has_been_visited" flag every frame, you can simply have a search counter that you increment each frame. Something like so:
openlist = [ start_node ]
do
node = openlist.remove_first()
for each edge in node.edges
child = node.follow_edge(edge)
if child.last_search_visit != FRAME_NUMBER
child.last_search_visit = FRAME_NUMBER
child.cost = node.cost + 1
child.previous = node
openlist.add(child)
while openlist is not empty
And then you just increment FRAME_NUMBER every frame.
Good luck!
Slightly unrelated, but have you seen the ASIPathFinder framework? Might help if you have more advanced pathfinding needs.
I would recommend just pre-computing the distance between all pairs of points in the map. This takes n^2/2 space where there are n traversable points in the map. According to this link there are 240 pellets on the board which means there are about 57k combinations of points that you could query distances between. This is pretty small, and can be compressed (see here) to take less space.
Then, at run time you don't have to do any real computation except look at your possible moves and the distance to reach that location.

How should I have my game entities knowledgeable of the things around them?

Every enemy type in my game is a different class, and the instances are stored in a C array. In the main game loop update() is run for each enemy/item instance, and draw() is run. Some of the update() commands require knowledge of where the main player is. What would be the best route to get that information to the instance? I don't think a global variable is the smart way to do it, since multiplayer options may be added later.
This is only an example of the bigger problem, which is how things in the game are supposed to know about each other. How would enemies know they're colliding with other enemies for example.
Your need to build a multi-branched tree type structure (not simple binary tree). The nodes are the locations in the game. Each node can contain multiple simple stuctures/objects pointers (depending on your programming language). As the player moves around the game you move your player position pointer to the tree node representing the location. When you start the game this tree type stucture is populated with things to pick up, monsters etc. A random seed can also be use to scatter monsters around.
This helps the speed of the game as you only have to search current node and nodes one step away from your current location/node. Any routines triggered that monsters advance or retreat just move the monsters pointer to the next node or nodes. If a med pack is used then its pointer is destroyed from the room/node that it is in.
Good luck
One way to make the search a bit more efficient is to split the entities being updated into a quad tree. The tree would get divided based on location on the screen or in the game world you have setup. This way you can set it up so only near by entities get updated. So for example if you're doing hit detection you can totally ignore large groups.
quad trees
hope that helps
A Controller entity?
You need to think carefully about using plain arrays, linear searches through large arrays can be very time consuming to search for things like collisions.
All entities in the game, including the player, should be in the same container. Your AI will loop through them every frame and call some function that executes all the goals of every entity.
Entities (like the player) have access to all other entities through the same container.
You'll have to get clever about the container to make the entity access to the container efficient, however.

How would you keep a top view of a train on the tracks with the Box2D physics engine?

I think it would be fun to model a top view of a train following a track, traversing switches and so on, using a physics library like Box2D. What joints and motors would I need to make this work?
I'm curious about how to implement the forces needed to make the car follow a spline track so it can bump into other train cars, pedestrians, DeLoreans etc. Just saying "the car is now at spline(t)" for each time step would create excessive forces in the physics engine. If I understand correctly, you have to stick the car onto the track with one force, constrain its angle to tend towards parallel with the track with another (or stick the front and back of the car to the track with two forces), and create another force to propel the train forward. I'm looking for some details on how to accomplish these things.
I believe it would be easier without "real" physics, like the ball movement of games such as Luxor or Tumble Bugs. Meaning: let the train follow a spline which is defined by the tracks.
Using phyiscs is probably overkill to make a train follow a track and could lead to all kinds of undesired side-effects, including jerky motion, train derailing, train getting stuck on junctions, etc.
You could still join the individual wagons together using physic joints, however. Just make sure that only the locomotive gets acceleration forces, the rest of the train just follows or is pushed but stays on the spline.
Why are you worried about keeping it "on the tracks"? Where is it going to go? Gravity should keep it down, object intersection should keep it up, and so the only directions you need to worry about are forward and backwards. That's where a motor comes in, and you're done. The rest is decorations.
In response to edit of problem:
Siderails. And have the train long enough / rigid enough compared to its width that you can navigate crossings (make them closer to right angles to minimize the crossing problems.
A top-down view (i.e. seeing the train from the sky) doesn't really require a 2d physics engine - if I understand you correctly. In fact, it seems like it wouldn't really help with the problem (if you want a train simulation), but then maybe you just wanna try it out for fun. :)
However, what about putting something like a slider joint on the train and the cars, and a motor on the locomotive. The slider joint might need some special implementation; you probably want to run the train along a spline and not a segment of straight lines, right?
Some sort of ball joint would connect the cars together.
The implementation is not so toughand I was able to prototype something in a few hours that does the basic job. It will require a lot of work to make it run smoothly, but it's essentially just "siderails."
Being top-down you obviously first must turn off gravity in Box2D. Second, build a train. Treat train wheels like car wheels and it'll suddenly get a lot more simple. For tracks you have a few choices:
Create your own game object (not in the box2D world) that is a simple line the train will then "follow" (you can use motors on train wheels to "steer" towards the line). Then just overlay the line with some nice wide "rail" graphics and you have a nicely faked system. Tell the wheels to turn off if it strays too far from the line and presto, you have a derailment.
Create actual physical rails - outside rails (like siderails) that the trains "wheels" will bump into. They will have to have gentle curves in this instance, which could be very difficult given the limited resources you have (simulating a nice slow curve out of boxes in Box2D is rough on the processor)
Then just let your train go!